Fame

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251717655
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4123635553
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,244,881
Expenses
$1,715,991
Assets
$9,621,301
Liabilities
$576,840

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARRYL WILEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DARRYL WILEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $107,734 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To educate, empower and embolden african american youth to become student ambassadors of today, leaders of tomorrow and stewards of their communities by providing access to college preparatory education at participating independent schools in the greater pittsburgh area through the provision of need based financial assistance.

What it reported doing in 2023

Fame academy - fame academy provides middle school students seeking a higher quality education within the greater pittsburgh area the academic foundation necessary to be competitive in the independent school application process, increasing the number of african american students with financial need that receive a rigorous education. The fame academy helps students excel within their home school community and exposes them to colleges and a variety of career choices. Within the fame academy, students also travel twice a year, once to cities outside of pittsburgh and once to a partner boarding school for an overnight, one-week stay. Students attend academic courses on saturdays throughout the school year and for six weeks during the summer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.61; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.3% of revenue deployed · 65.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.